{"id":"risk-postmortem-risk-committee","audience":"compliance","category":"legal-compliance","track":"legal","technique":"audience","level":"intermediate","title":"Summarize an incident post-mortem for the risk committee chair","free":false,"task":"Tomas Reinholt chairs the risk committee and has two minutes. Write a prompt for a plain-text summary with four lines starting What happened:, Why it happened:, What we are doing:, Open for the privacy lead:. Under 150 words. Name no individuals. Give the cause as the process gaps in the notes, not \"operator error\". The privacy lead has not decided whether anyone must be notified, so state it as open.","materialLabel":"Your material (attached to your prompt automatically)","material":"POST-MORTEM DRAFT - Misdirected bills, Wexley Utilities\nTimeline: 3 Nov 09:10 a mail-merge sent 412 customer bills to the previous billing contact on each account. 10:25 first customer complaint. 10:50 job stopped. 14:00 privacy lead told.\nDraft cause (from the first author): \"operator error by the analyst who ran the job\".\nFacts from the review: the template had no pre-send sample check; a change to the contact field mapping went live on 31 Oct with no second reviewer; the analyst followed the runbook as written.\nActions: add a pre-send sample check (IT Ops, due 21 Nov); require a second reviewer for template changes (Change board, due 28 Nov).\nPrivacy lead (Hana Ibarra) is assessing whether any notification is needed. No decision yet.","rules":[{"type":"plainText"},{"type":"maxWords","max":150}],"promptHints":[{"label":"Four labels","patterns":["what happened:","why it happened:"]},{"label":"Cause","patterns":["process","no pre-send","operator error"]},{"label":"Actions","patterns":["owner","due"]},{"label":"Open item","patterns":["no decision","open","assessing"]},{"label":"No names","patterns":["no individuals","name no","no names"]}],"mistakes":[{"title":"Blaming the analyst","why":"AI repeats 'operator error' from the draft.","fix":"Say: \"Give the cause as process gaps; do not write operator error; name no one.\"","checks":["r0"]},{"title":"Actions without owners","why":"AI lists generic improvements.","fix":"Say: \"Both actions with owner and due date.\"","checks":["r1"]},{"title":"Deciding on notification","why":"AI says customers must or need not be notified.","fix":"Say: \"Say the privacy lead's assessment is open with no decision yet.\"","checks":["r2"]},{"title":"Getting markdown back","why":"AI adds bold, headings and bullets by default, which show up as stray symbols when pasted.","fix":"Say \"plain text, no bold, no headings, no asterisks\".","checks":["plainText"]},{"title":"Trusting the AI to count words","why":"AI is bad at counting and usually runs long, so a vague \"keep it short\" lands over the limit.","fix":"Cap each part instead of the total, for example \"each line under 15 words\".","checks":["maxWords"]}],"hint":"Give the four labels, the cause to use and how to word the open item.","mission":"Brief the committee chair in four lines.","musts":["Process cause, no blame","Actions with owners","Notification left open"],"rubricLabels":["There are four lines starting What happened:, Why it happened:, What we are doing: and Open for the privacy lead: in that order","Why it happened gives the missing pre-send check and the 31 Oct change with no second reviewer, does not use \"operator error\", and names no individual","What we are doing includes both actions with owners and dates, and the last line says the privacy lead is assessing notification with no decision yet, without stating that notification is or is not required"]}